No, Not All Women Are Like That

“because you will be stripped of everything that you have”, “the female has been manifested in their life as only the negative archetype” – no professor. This is a falsification. It’s not that all women will or that all women are that negative archetype. It’s that all women can and have the opportunity to be that negative archetype due to the laws written in their favor.

According to the US CENSUS, 97% of all alimony recipients are female and one cannot be the alimony recipient unless one is also the divorce settlement recipient. The divorce rate is just over 50% and women initiate divorce in over 70% of cases.

It’s not that all women will or that all women are that negative archetype. It’s that all women can and have the opportunity to be that negative archetype due to the laws written in their favor.

I will re-state the preceding quote, repeatedly: and hopefully these hyperbolic claims about MGTOW will thereby be put in a clearer context as being a gross miss-characterization about us. It is nothing more than slander to assert that MGTOWs simply out of the malevolence of their black hearts hate women. That is not the case: what we hate is the way in which the legal system has been corrupted by ideological dogma and now enforces legally sanctioned double standards in direct opposition to and violation of the 14th amendment.

We are abstaining from placing ourselves in danger until we have equal representation and protection under the law thank you very much.

What MGTOW points out, and can be objectively verified: is that relationships present the inherent danger to men that if they last long enough; common law marriage becomes available. Prenuptial agreements can be violated by a court order, and even when not, they often have limitations. Janet Jackson, who already had more money than any reasonable person could spend in a lifetime, just months ago, divorced Wissam Al Mana for $200 million dollars. This she did just 2 months after the 5 year agreement on the prenuptial agreement ended.

It’s not that all women will or that all women are that negative archetype. It’s that all women can and have the opportunity to be that negative archetype due to the laws written in their favor.

Any relationship which becomes a marriage, or simply lasts long enough to become a common law marriage carries with it the over 50% chance that you will lose half your liquid assets, quite possibly your own home, and you may even be burdened further with alimony. Paying forth money to someone whom you are not legally responsible for in any way but to provide for them financially.

Earning money which is then taken from you and given to someone else who will be benefit from the fruits of your labor: a definition of slavery if ever there existed one.

MGTOW are teaching men that relationships are a game of russian roulette, in the best case scenarios: to say nothing of false accusations of abuse or child custody.

It’s not that all women will or that all women are that negative archetype. It’s that all women can and have the opportunity to be that negative archetype due to the laws written in their favor.

Your simplification, Peterson, is a fabrication of the argument put forth. An argument which is easily verified as being a concrete observation and assessment of reality. Women are not necessarily the problem: it is the corrupted laws, which are the problem. Any ability or wiggle room you provide humans to abuse a system: they will. It is a guarantee, it is human nature. This is why legal documents are so long winded, winding, circuitous and verbose: to intentionally make every possible exclamation imaginable in order to avoid as many loopholes and opportunities for abuse as possible. So much so, that it is often referred to by the vernacular “legalese.”

Rebuttals…

But “all men could be rapists, how is that different?” –

1, it is illegal for a man to rape a woman.

But But 1.A: “Rape is difficult to prove!” – Men have been put in prison for decades on no evidence other than a woman’s accusation, even if that accusation was false. As has been PROVEN time and time again by the Innocence Project’s use of DNA evidence.

But But But 1.B: “False rape accusations are very rare!” – The number of false convictions overturned by being proven innocent, absolutely proven, innocent: by the innocence project, is far greater than the 5-6% statistic quoted by feminists would allow for.

2, It is perfectly legal for a woman to commit extortion against a man, inside a court of law.

Marriage today, in America, is identical to the legal definition of extortion. It is “The obtaining of property from another induced”—”under color of official right.” The legal system has been manipulated to make marriage the legal definition of extortion. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. It is, by strict legal definition, extortion.

Furthermore, Alimony is a multi-BILLION (with a B, BILLION) dollar EXTORTION SCAM which is almost exclusively reserved for women.

According to this report by the treasury department, in the year 2010 alone there were $10 BILLION dollars in alimony tax write offs filed. $2.3 billion of this is untraceable, meaning a lot of people were cheating on their taxes by claiming more than what was paid, or claiming they paid that which they did not, and an unknown number of recipients who claimed they didn’t receive something which they -did-.Even, however, if you exclude the $2.3 billion unaccounted for, that still leaves $7.7 BILLION dollars if Alimony payments being claimed on taxes, all with unique individual and verified Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TIN).

According to the last US Census, 97% of alimony recipients are women. So once again I say: Alimony is a multi-BILLION-dollar EXTORTION SCAM which is almost exclusively reserved for women.

“Extortion: The obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.”

You PAY your alimony, or people with guns (law enforcement) will show up at your door, or place of employment, put you in handcuffs and throw you in jail – where anyone without noticeable gang affiliations has a high probability of getting raped.

The obtaining of property from another – Check
induced by wrongful use of:
–actual or threatened force – Check
–violence – Check
–Fear – Check
under color of official right – Check

Marriage is an extortion scam: it is indefensibly identical to the definition of extortion. What’s more: even if the woman is successful and extraordinarily wealthy (I.E. Janet Jackson): if you have more than she has – she will still be permitted to legally commit EXTORTION within a court of law.

According to the FBI, and anyone with two brain cells to rub together, this is rape. This is clearly and undeniably, unabashedly RAPE. You threaten someone at gunpoint and force them to perform sex. That is rape by any reasonable, rational, logical definition of the term, that is RAPE. According to the CDC, that is not rape—that is “made to penetrate,” a LESSER sexual assault than rape.

“Although consideration of male victims is within the scope of the legal statutes, it is important to restrict the term rape to instances where male victims were penetrated by offenders. It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.”

Read that again a few times if you need to. Pay attention, “instances where male victims were penetrated by offenders”, so if a woman uses an object or her fingers to penetrate a man’s mouth or anus it is in fact still rape. However: if a woman uses force, threats/coercion (such gunpoint like the Ciera Ross case above) to force a man to put him penis in her or someone else , despite his protestations or forces it in herself such as if he is unconscious from alcohol or date rape drugs… It’s not rape. Why? Simple: “It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.” I think most reasonable, rational, logical people would unanimously exclaim from the rooftops that “unwanted sexual intercourse”, when you have said no, is in fact Rape, wouldn’t they?

Thanks to feminist Mary P. Koss’s work with the CDC, “no means no” no longer applies to men. FEMINIST: Mary P. Koss isn’t just a “Rape Apologist”, she’s a full blown, verified, shameless “Victim Blamer“. She quite clearly in the same sentence, of her own written work, in an official document of the Department of Justice: National Criminal Justice Reference Service, absolves Women of raping men by exclaiming males raped by women are not victims of Rape. In the same sentence she, a feminist, exclaims that the victims “unwanted sexual intercourse” are NOT victims of Rape: provided the victim is male and the perpetrator is female. She does more than simply blame the VICTIM, she absolves the PERPETRATOR. I’ll say it again: If there is a rape culture, feminists are creating it.

This was done strictly so that Koss could publish intentionally tampered with and gender-biased research data on the rate at which female victims are raped. You see, having a number of males victimized equal to that of women doesn’t look good when you’re trying to talk about “patriarchy” and the inherent “rape culture” found in it, which has a narrative that all men are potential rapists and all women are potential victims.

If there was a male-dominated rape culture, rape would have been made legal before women could vote. Feminists, however, have gone through some very shady and underhanded tactics to conceal the rate at which men are raped by women—going so far as to reclassify the definition of terms to exclude men as being able to be raped by women. Just so they could publish altered statistics.

Do you see the difference? The system is rigged, the deck is stacked, the game is fixed.

This article, for the sake of brevity didn’t even touch on the issue of child custody and paternity fraud or double standard domestic violence laws. We know very well Not All Women Are Like That (NAWALT): but all women are given the opportunity to be like that and what’s more their actions will be given a legal sanction. All due to how the law has been rewritten in the past 50 years.

MGTOWs simply decide to step away from the table: and not participate in something so thoroughly maligned against men.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

Published by

Observing Libertarian

I am a Humanist small L libertarian Deontological Minarchist. In that order - As a result of this philosophy: I cannot in good conscience condone the actions of any group, movement or organization which seeks to oppress another individuals human rights. By education I have an Associates of Occupational Studies in Gunsmithing, and am qualified to testify in Open Court on the State's behalf as a Firearms expert. I am also an NRA Certified Firearm Instructor. I am currently in the Process of writing two books on Philosophy
View all posts by Observing Libertarian